Years of Citing Articles

Bookmark

OpenURL

Abstract

Similarities between Pavlovian conditioning in nonhumans and causal judgment by humans suggest that similar processes operate in these situations. Notably absent among the similarities is backward blocking (i.e., retrospective devaluation of a signal due to increased valuation of another signal that was present during training), which has been observed in causal judgment by humans but not in Pavlovian responding by animals. The authors used rats to determine if this difference arises from the target cue being biologically significant in the Pavlovian case but not in causal judgment. They used a sensory preconditioning procedure in Experiments 1 and 2, in which the target cue retained low biological significance during the treatment, and obtained backward blocking. The authors found in Experiment 3 that forward blocking also requires the target cue to be of low biological significance. Thus, low biological significance is a necessary condition for a stimulus to be vulnerable to blocking. In recent years, numerous researchers have remarked on the similarity of the conditions that encourage the acquisition of causal relationships in humans and those that foster

... blocking in rats that was obtained in Experiment 1. But in Experiment 2 it incorrectly predicts equal backward blocking in the backward-blocking group and Control 1 relative to Control 2 (unless the =-=Dickinson and Burke, 1996-=-, variant of the Revised RescorlaWagner model is considered), and in Experiment 3 neither variant of the Revised Rescorla-Wagner model predicts the observed loss of forward blocking with intense CSs. ...

...earchers have remarked on the similarity of the conditions that encourage the acquisition of causal relationships in humans and those that foster Pavlovian conditioning in animals (e.g., Allan, 1993; =-=Shanks & Dickinson, 1987-=-; Wasserman, 1990, 1993). The observed similarities have stimulated the suggestion that similar processes underlie these two types of learning. Such a view would be best supported if each specific phe...

... numerous researchers have remarked on the similarity of the conditions that encourage the acquisition of causal relationships in humans and those that foster Pavlovian conditioning in animals (e.g., =-=Allan, 1993-=-; Shanks & Dickinson, 1987; Wasserman, 1990, 1993). The observed similarities have stimulated the suggestion that similar processes underlie these two types of learning. Such a view would be best supp...

...For example, it explains the observed differences in efficacy of the four different types of trials: CS and US present, CS present and US absent, CS absent and US present, and CS and US absent (e.g., =-=Kao & Wasserman, 1993-=-). Additionally, unlike the original Rescorla-Wagner model, it predicts changes in responding to a CS as a result of either posttraining reinforcement or extinction of other cues that were present dur...

...the similarity of the conditions that encourage the acquisition of causal relationships in humans and those that foster Pavlovian conditioning in animals (e.g., Allan, 1993; Shanks & Dickinson, 1987; =-=Wasserman, 1990-=-, 1993). The observed similarities have stimulated the suggestion that similar processes underlie these two types of learning. Such a view would be best supported if each specific phenomenon observed ...

... our view that cues of high biological significance are protected against cue competition. However, Van Hamme (1994), using the revised Rescoda-Wagner model of Van Hamme and Wasserman (1994; also see =-=Markman, 1989-=-; Tassoni, 1995), has offered an alternative explanation of this difference in backward blocking that focuses on species differences. Here, we briefly describe the revised RescorlaWagner model and con...

...ations that successfully foster recovery from overshadowing and blocking. Overshadowing can often be attenuated by posttraining extinction of the overshadowing stimulus (e.g., Kaufman & Bolles, 1980; =-=Matzel, Schachtman, & Miller, 1985-=-), whereas blocking does not appear to be influenced by posttraining extinction of the blocking stimulus (e.g., Miller, Schachtman, & Matzel, 1988). Thus, it may be misleading to treat all forms of cu...

...cues of high biological significance are protected against cue competition. However, Van Hamme (1994), using the revised Rescoda-Wagner model of Van Hamme and Wasserman (1994; also see Markman, 1989; =-=Tassoni, 1995-=-), has offered an alternative explanation of this difference in backward blocking that focuses on species differences. Here, we briefly describe the revised RescorlaWagner model and consider its abili...

...the cues are not made biologically significant until after the blocking treatment. To prevent X from gaining biological significance during Phase 1, we used a sensory preconditioning procedure (e.g., =-=Rizley & Rescorla, 1972-=-). In a conventional sensory preconditioning procedure, two stimuli of low biological significance (let us call them A and B) are serially paired in Phase 1 (i.e., A---->B, with A serving as a CS and ...

...ing training of that CS (i.e., companion stimuli). This predicted increase in responding to a target CS as a result of posttraining extinction of companion stimuli has been reported in animals (e.g., =-=Dickinson & Charnock, 1985-=-; Matzel, Schachtman, & Miller, 1985), and the predicted decrease in responding to a target stimulus as a result of posttraining reinforcement of companion stimuli has been reported in humans (e.g., C...

...cues of inherently high biological significance to animals, and hence would be relatively immune to cue competition. However, there are several reports of blocking and overshadowing of flavors (e.g., =-=Bonardi, Honey, & Hall, 1990-=-; Revusky, 1971). We acknowledge a potential problem here. However, these studies did not include parametric manipulation of the concentration of the target flavor to see if blocking decreases with in...

...ical significance to animals, and hence would be relatively immune to cue competition. However, there are several reports of blocking and overshadowing of flavors (e.g., Bonardi, Honey, & Hall, 1990; =-=Revusky, 1971-=-). We acknowledge a potential problem here. However, these studies did not include parametric manipulation of the concentration of the target flavor to see if blocking decreases with increasing concen...

...e biological significance of the stimulus. We elaborate on this variable in the General Discussion. 3 We say "effective" to allow the acquisition of ineffective (i.e., latent) associations (e.g., see =-=Balaz, Gutsin, Cacheiro, & Miller, 1981-=-).372 MILLER AND MATUTE stimulus does not become a cue of high biological significance and consequently elicits little conditioned responding. However, things are quite different in the case of backw...

...s an underlying similarity among them. In many respects, there are grounds for this assumption. For example, in both causal judgment (e.g., Shanks & Dickinson, 1987) and Pavlovian preparations (e.g., =-=Miller, Kasprow, & Schachtman, 1986-=-) deficits in performance due to cue competition appear to be reversible without further training with the target cue, thereby suggesting that all forms of cue competition reflect performance failures...

...overshadowing stimulus (e.g., Kaufman & Bolles, 1980; Matzel, Schachtman, & Miller, 1985), whereas blocking does not appear to be influenced by posttraining extinction of the blocking stimulus (e.g., =-=Miller, Schachtman, & Matzel, 1988-=-). Thus, it may be misleading to treat all forms of cue competition as if they were equivalent. However, the present research is concerned exclusively with blocking. 370BIOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE 371 th...